From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 17 Sep 92 21:20:32 GMT
From: att!cbnews!cbnewsm!cbnewsl!willett@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (david.c.willett)
Subject: Re: Enumerations
Message-ID: <1992Sep17.212032.18906@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>>From article <9209162110.AA21397@efftoo.boeing.com>, by crispen@efftoo.boeing.
com (crispen):
> First, the caveat: I *know* that without rep specs all data in Ada is
> abstract.
> 
> But what I'd like to know is, does anyone know of an Ada compiler
> which does not give a machine value of zero for the first element of
> an enumeration, one for the second, and so on?
> 
> Just idle curiosity, actually, since it came up in the context of a
> document I'm writing that's going to say, "Use rep specs for interface
> objects and don't trust different compilers to do the same thing".
> 
> Thanks,
> +-------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
> | Bob Crispen                   |   The owls are not what they seem    |
> | crispen@foxy.boeing.com       +--------------------------------------+
> | (205) 461-3296                |Opinions expressed here are mine alone|
> +-------------------------------+--------------------------------------+

I don't have an answer to your specific question, but as a matter of principle
I would use rep specs for all "interface objects" (I presume you mean objects
specified in an interface definition).  You may wish to consider supplying 
the interface definition as a package of type definitions replete with rep
specs.


-- 
Dave Willett          AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies
attmail!dwillett      (AT&T FSAT)

A dog is a dog until he is facing you.  Then he is *MISTER* dog!